Die Bedeutung der Zirkulations- – und Produktionssphäre für die Kapitalismuskritik
„ Der Besitzer der Ware Arbeitskraft und der Geldbesitzer begegnen in the market and enter into a relationship to each other as equal owners of commodities you ..... contract as free persons legally equal .... They relate to each other only as owners of commodities and exchange equivalent for equivalent. .. " (Marx: Capital Vol I, p. 182 - 190, quoted in George Otto, why Marxism had failed, Green Series, 1991.)
here as a commodity, money is set equal to labor power (equivalent) . Money is a neutral mediating the economic process asset. In this respect, the criticism is to be found exclusively in production. As the owner of scarce economic good means of production, the capitalist is in a position to landless workers zu erpressen, um sich den von ihm erzeugten Mehrwert anzueignen. Die Entstehung und Aneignung des Mehrwertes lässt sich wie folgt erklären:
Der Unternehmer als Eigentümer der Produktionsmittel bezahlt den Arbeiter für z.B. 8 Stunden Arbeit. Dabei kauft er dessen Arbeitskraft zu einem Wert (Lohn), der durch die Reproduktionskosten der Arbeitskraft bestimmt wird. Dies ist die nötige Warenmenge, um den Arbeiter einen Tag arbeitsfähig zu erhalten. Beispielsweise reichen dazu 4 Stunden Arbeit. Der Unternehmer benutzt bzw. gebraucht aber diese Arbeitskraft 8 Stunden lang. Der Gebrauchswert der Arbeitskraft ist also größer als sein Tauschwert (Lohn gegen Arbeitskraft). So entsteht first a quantity of goods that may be twice as large as the true amount needed to maintain the work force. When selling those quantities in the market may generate a value that is twice as large as the value of maintaining work force. The difference is the added value retained by the contractor. The sale of goods and thus the value realization but must be enforced against other players as competitors. This leads to the profit orientation of the entire production process (production + recovery), because otherwise the goods suppliers are squeezed from the market, sitting on his goods would remain, thereby limiting the production and workers would have to dismiss. This profit orientation - The focus on "more" - passes over the target, production in response to societal needs, organize, leads to alienation of man from its products. Also, private ownership of productive assets in the hands of workers would not change this situation. So it is logical to abolish the private ownership of means of production and the market altogether in order to overcome this rejection.
At this assessment, which relies on Marx's criticism of the Socialists appointed to Freiwirtschaftler. They argue that the production of goods given for the market already for centuries and this was initially not for profit orientation of economic activity resulted. It was the perfection of the monetary system, the occurrence and the accumulation of money capital facilitated this development. Money can be hoarded in contrast to all other goods (hoarding), this shortage and the economic cycle to be withdrawn as a necessary means of exchange. With the other properties of the repartee (bargain purchase) and the transport capacity, it just is not equivalent to other goods. The possibility of hoarding distinguishes the money owners, justified its special position of power, but which must be protected by the state. Moreover, this has been what Marx saw, but the appropriate conclusions from it denied, and even fought (see George Otto, why Marxism had failed, Green Series, 1991)
How does from this position of power?
The owner of money can be the input of the benefits of cash holdings (Hortungsfähigkeit, wit, portability), so that production resources can be acquired by paying the interest. The contractor must produce profit because of this interest payment, otherwise it goes into bankruptcy. If, however, financial capital free of interest available is the purchase of production means easier and reduces the possibility of blackmailing businessman towards the wage earners, the added value appropriation disappears, the profit goes to zero. (See also Jürgen Probst, failures of an interest rate economy, 2.Auflg. In 1998, self-Verlag, Hannover, Note 1)
is indisputable for all critics of capitalism, that the value added by labor, arises therefore in production. The Freiwirtschaftler accuse the Marxists that they are blind to the events in the sphere of circulation and see their consequences for the sphere of production do not especially not between money holders (Geldkapital) und Unternehmern (Besitzer von Sachkapital) unterschieden. Produktionsmittel (Sachkapital) und alle anderen am Wirtschaftsprozess beteiligten Größen müssen durch den Einsatz von Geldkapital erworben werden. Auch Marx spricht immer wieder vom Geldbesitzer: „ Der Geldbesitzer hat den Tageswert der Arbeitskraft gezahlt, ihm gehört daher ihr Gebrauch während des ganzen Tages. ...“. Danach ist der Unternehmer zunächst Geldbesitzer, um dann später in der Produktion Eigentümer von Produktionsmittel zu sein. Doch in der modernen kapitalistischen Wirtschaft sind Unternehmer nicht so sehr Eigentümer von Produktionsmitteln, sondern eher deren Besitzer, die zwar über die Verwendung von Produktionsmitteln bzw. Mehrwert bestimmen können, aber die eigentlichen Eigentümer die Geldbesitzer sind, die ihnen das Geld als Kredit zum Erwerb von Produktionsmittel , von Material, Gebäuden und Arbeitskraft geliehen haben. Deutsche Unternehmer haben in der Regel 60 bis 80% ihres Unternehmens mit Fremdmittel finanziert. Sichtbar wird dieser Eigentümer dann, wenn das Unternehmen die Zinsen nicht mehr zahlen kann und das Eigentum im Konkurs eingefordert wird.
Der Geldgeber – Geldkapitalist - bestimmt die Regeln, nach denen das Spiel "Produktion" in Unternehmen gespielt wird. Die "Spielregeln" der Produktion: das sind nicht nur die Zinsforderungen - das sind die "Produktionsverhältnisse" including proprietary shaped disposition powers of capital in the company. ie mainly the production of goods under the dictates of profit maximization as it is sanctioned by the government lending money
This interest is not merely a manifestation of profit. It differs from this especially true:
(1) Interest is first negotiated, only then will the money from a risk minimization (collateral) is awarded. In order to achieve a profit that is always fraught with risk, money must first be borrowed and invested.
(2) interest, in contrast to profit both theoretically and practically fall to zero.
(3) The sum of all interest increases proportionally with the investment and capital composition. The sum of all profits goes fairly in this regard back (Keynes: diminishing ability of the invested capital)
Not surprisingly therefore, not at all, that under the conditions of the capitalist money in forms of ownership have been established and codified by law or recognized, or for which the money capital has the last word.
It has to be questioned in particular, whether greed is settled after more in production, which is as profit maximization necessarily derive from market transactions. It is quite conceivable that a contractor satisfied with his assurance 'income with a zero rate of return is. Of course, the conflict of interests between owners of means of production and the workers at these means of production can not be denied, neither can that one's obsolete commodity production are being replaced by more effective. Socialists see in this conflict of interest at the heart of the problem of the capitalist mode of production: As long as people are separated from their living and production base, the means of production, they are blackmailed and would to submit to the objectives of the owners. It would not sfragen distribution or sfragen settlement - but the basics of production had ever criticize and to question.
Says Bernd Senf (cash flow and the real economy ...., script on the website www.berndsenf.de, 2002): considered Marxist, would be overcome with .. ". of the problems in the sphere of circulation "... the contradiction between wage labor and capital ...... - Not overcome. But if the pressure of money-capital to the rest of society - including to the entrepreneurial capitalists - Has become the dominant conflict is, then should not the solution to this conflict come first, without having to be displaced because of other conflicts? "
is also considered that was abolished in the great painful experiment of real socialism, private ownership of means of production and the market, but not the exploitation of man by man, by the capitalism state capitalism was preserved.
tendency for Rate of profit
The tendency of the rate of profit is for Marxists Eckfeiler for the explanation of capitalist crises. The rate of profit is derived from the ratio of surplus value to the used in production on assets, the value is determined by the difference between the one working a total of values \u200b\u200bproduced and the values \u200b\u200bthat are to receive the work force needed. The total capital is here only of the constant capital (cost of production equipment and materials) and variable capital ((wage costs combined). The tendency of the rate of profit results from the fact that in the struggle for the profit (return) the total capital by increasing of constant capital (investment) is increased, bringing the ratio of value added to total capital - the rate of profit - will "tend to be" humiliated. The tendency is, this is about the evolution of the average rate of profit. This initially plausible claim is illustrated by an example would that relies on Marx and Marxism from a Nick Beams on the World Socialist Web Site ( http://www.wsws.org/de/korres/korres.shtml ) as a letter to the editor on 04.04.2000 under the title "The falling rate of profit" was:
The rate of profit is derived from the ratio of the added value to the total capital used in production. If the total capital is set such as 100, consisting of constant capital in the order of 80 and variable capital of 20, and also the added value rate is 100 percent, which means that the production process produces a value of 20, then the profit rate 20 / 100 or 20 percent.
The tendency of the rate of profit results from the fact that with increasing labor productivity, the proportion of constant capital in the production process is growing. That is, the proportion of living labor is supplied in proportion to the means of production, it begins to move downward trend. Da jedoch die lebendige Arbeit die einzige Quelle des Mehrwerts darstellt, folgt daraus, dass die Profitrate, die sich aus dem Verhältnis zum eingesetzten Gesamtkapital errechnet, tendenziell ebenfalls sinkt.
Nehmen wir ein Kapital von 200, bestehend aus konstantem Kapital von 180 und variablem Kapital von 20. Bei einer Mehrwertrate von 100 Prozent, die einem Mehrwert von 20 entspricht, haben wir bei diesem Kapital eine Profitrate von 20/200 bzw. 10 Prozent.
Die an diesem Beispiel verdeutlichte Behauptung vom tendenziellen Fall der Profitrate, setzt voraus, dass der Mehrwert konstant bleibt. Kompliziert werden jedoch die Verhältnisse, wenn durch Investition, d.h. durch Sachkapitalvergrößerung, sowohl die notwendige Arbeit (variables Kapitals) verkleinert als auch der Mehrwert durch einen größeren Warenausstoß (Produktivitätsfortschritt aufgrund der Investition) erhöht wird. Insbesondere werden die Verwertungszusammenhänge nicht sorgfältig analysiert.
Zunächst entsteht ja auf der Produktionsseite ein Mehr an Waren, deren Wert erst am Markt bestimmt wird. Auch der Mehrwert hat seine Entsprechung in der Warenproduktion. Es sind wiederum hauptsächlich die Lohnbezieher, repräsentiert durch das variable Kapital, die die Werte bestimmen. Einfacher ausgedrückt: Die Lohnabhängigen kaufen the goods they produce, even with the wages they receive for their work. But what happens to the goods produced beyond? Who buys them? (See Note 1). More about how it is to be converted into value goods? There are two possibilities:
first by the larger range of goods, prices go down, on average, the workers can buy more. Or the workers receive a higher wage, and can thus buy more goods, it means that your own on More on the goods. The added value will be transferred to the workers.
second A part of the greater range of goods is in the demand for capital goods. There is an increase in the capital goods prices. Means of production, materials would cost the investing business more, increase its capital is constant at the expense of the added value first. On the side of the capital goods production would increase by the higher prices but the added value. It is difficult to estimate and need detailed analysis, in which direction would be to exploit the multi-develop products for added value. The developments of the profit rate is difficult to predict. It depends on the Marktverhältnissen, der Verwertungsebene ab.
An dieser Stelle wird sichtbar, wie wichtig die Vorgänge auf der Verwertungsebene, die man auch Zirkulationssphäre nennen könnte, für die Profitentstehung sind.
Für beide Fälle gilt aber, dass irgendwann die Bedürfnisse für eine Warenkauf gesättigt sind und der Verwertungsprozess stoppt. Keynes spricht dann von einer langfristig abnehmenden Grenzleistungsfähigkeit des Investitions- Kapitals, nämlich die Fähigkeit, Rendite zu erbringen. Dieser Begriff beschreibt auf diesem Erklärungshintergrund viel klarer die Probleme einer kapitalistischen Wirtschaft als der Begriff vom tendenziellen Fall der Profitrate, weil er die Vorgänge in der Zirkulationssphäre stärker einbezieht. Das die Warenzirkulation erst ermöglichende Geldsystem kommt dadurch stärker in die Analyse als bei Marxisten.
In dem oben erwähnten Artikel von Nick Beams über den Fall der Profitrate kommt es deswegen auch zu Widersprüchen. Dort heißt es:
Mit anderen Worten, während die technologische Entwicklung den Anteil des konstanten Kapitals steigert und damit die Durchschnittsprofitrate senkt, erhöht sie gleichzeitig auch den erzielten Mehrwert und führt damit tendenziell zu einer höheren Profitrate. Wenn die Steigerung der Mehrarbeit hinreichend groß ist, the case can hold up the rate of profit or even reversed.
It is this argument even use today's economists, if they have a continuous economic growth at a high level of demand in order to avoid or overcome crises.
He also referred to the law of the tendency of the rate of profit as the only scientific explanation of the basis for the economic post-war boom and its end: led
The development and dissemination of assembly line production throughout the capitalist world during the period after the war to an enormous increase in labor productivity. That is, these approaches resulted in a significant reduction of the necessary means of working with a higher added value. could
This statement overlooks the fact that the war was a huge destruction of capital and the power of capital to generate returns at a high level to start again. The interpretation of Keynes to fit better. The increase in labor productivity is the explanation for the postwar boom. The ability to provide a capitalist economy with low capital accumulation due to strong demand for commodities high return is the other.
Note 1 to "Downward trend Falling rate of profit) (Probst p. 15)
... the power comes from the desirability of the goods produced, they are not popular, however, can - to put it bluntly - nail "the capital of a pre-production resources knee ....
0 comments:
Post a Comment